Prolonged corrected QT interval in predicting atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Issue 3 (16th February 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zhang, Nixiao; Gong, Mengqi; Tse, Gary; Zhang, Zhiwei; Meng, Lei; Yan, Bryan P.; Zhang, Ling; Wu, Gang; Xia, Yunlong; Xin‐Yan, Gan; Li, Guangping; Liu, Tong
• Is Part Of: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology. Volume 41:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: 321
• Page End: 327
• Publication Date: 2018-02-16
• Subjects: atrial fibrillation -- meta‐analysis -- prolonged QTc interval -- risk; Cardiac pacing -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; 617.4120645
• DOI: 10.1111/pace.13292
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0147-8389

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Corrected QT interval (QTc) on the electrocardiogram is a marker of ventricular repolarization. Recent studies have examined its value in predicting the occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results: We conducted a meta‐analysis to determine whether alterations in QTc interval are associated with an increased risk of incident AF. The PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched for all studies that evaluated the incident AF associated with prolonged QTc interval published before December 2016. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis were subsequently performed. A total of six studies including eight data sets for prolonged QTc interval were eligible. Subjects with prolonged QTc interval as a categorical variable had a significantly higher risk of AF during follow‐up (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09–1.24, I 2 = 90%) based on Bazett formula. In continuous variable analysis, we found a statistically significant risk for AF (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.09–1.25; I 2 = 0) every 10‐ms prolongation in QTc. AF type, QTc cut‐off value, geographical location, follow‐up duration, and study population may be the possible reasons for the significant heterogeneity among the studies. Conclusions: Prolonged QTc interval is associated with an increased risk of AF. And the potential mechanisms underlying this cause‐and‐effect relationship need further investigation.